Silver Spoons Starring the Obamas

Maybe Obama wasn’t born with a silver spoon in his mouth, but he has spent the last three years luxuriating on our dime.

For the sake of fairness I decided to re-cut the opening credits of the 80’s sitcom ‘Silver Spoons’, and make the Obamas the stars.

Selective Outrage: Rock the Slut Vote Edition

Rush Limbaugh has been lambasted for referring to Sandra Fluke as a ‘slut’.   The use of this word enraged feminists (read the liberal left) and birthed the still unsubstantiated, “GOP war on women”.

While poking around on some democrat sites yesterday I came upon what I first took to be a ruse, a prank, perpetrated by The Onion perhaps.   But oh no my dear readers, I assure you that this very real.

I give you: ROCK THE SLUT VOTE

Check it out y’all there is even a facebook group which as of today, has been liked by, what I presume to be 854 “sluts”.

And have no fear the Rock the Slut Vote twitter account is here!

If you would like to weigh in on what the Rock the Slut Vote theme song should be, better respond to this tweet before your vote goes uncounted….

Are all of you formerly angry women now happy to wrap your arms around such an insulting term?  Is this some attempt to ‘take back the night slut’?

I see you’re also selling t-shirts.  Are you profiting off of the term now too?  If so I think you may owe Mr. Limbaugh some royalties or at the very least a thank you note.  Good luck sluts ladies!

Oh and just in case there was any doubt about which party the Rock the Slut Vote contingent backs, this map, from their site should clear up any confusion.

From Cross-Hairs to Kicking Ass

When Congresswoman Gabbie Giffords and 18 others were shot by lone lunatic Jared Lee Loughner, the media and democrat politicians quickly rushed to microphones to blame Sarah Palin. Why blame Palin? Because she had posted, on her website a political map that highlighted “targeted districts”, with cross-hairs and one of those districts was Giffords’.

Surely this picture is what set off the shooting spree of a madmen right? I don’t see the correlation, but democrats had no problem making the connection. They would have us believe that violent imagery and rhetoric is dangerous.

Based on their own standard, in the spirit of everybody playing by the same rules, and everyone getting a fair shake, I believe it is necessary to point out that the DNC has been operating “Kicking-Ass Blog” since 2003.

Here are a few screen grabs for the DNC’s website

Notice the date on this – last updated January 6 2012

This link was what originally tipped me off to the existence of “Kicking Ass Blog”. I stumbled on to it yesterday (April 5, 2012) while doing a search for news on DNC Chairwoman Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s visit to Philadelphia.

DNC Chairwoman Wasserman Schutlz was in my area for an event with Congresswoman Allyson Schwartz (D-PA).
” these women were united in outrage that so many members of the Republican Party—from presidential candidate Mitt Romney to Pennsylvania Gov. Tom Corbett—are going after their rights and their health.”

“United in outrage” says the article I found by clicking the link entitled – DNC: Kicking Ass – Blog. What happens with you add outrage to kicking ass ? I expect that they will try to brush this off as a simple play on words, based upon the imagery of the democrat donkey kicking its feet up in the air. But remember we all must play by the same rules and when you measure this against the same standards the democrats demanded from republicans in the wake of the Loughner shooting/cross-hair ad, this name should be considered outrageous, violent and potentially dangerous.

I expect DNC Chairwoman, Debbie Wasserman Schultz to come out and denounce the usage of the term “Kick-Ass Blog” and demand that, that phraseology be removed from the site immediately.

Smartest President Ever: The “UN-INTELLECTED” Edition

President Obama, aka the ‘smartest’ president ever, made yet another word-blunder during today’s joint press conference with Prime Minister Harper and Presidente Calderon. I am going to go out on a limb here and bet that none of the nightly news programs will report on the gaffe.
I’m happy to do their job for them, go to :47 on this clip and you will hear President Obama say, “an UN-INTELLECTED group of people”. Yes that’s right, our president, the ‘smartest’ president ever said ‘UN-INTELLECTED’. Also earlier on in the clip, if you care to watch the whole thing, smartypants can be heard demonstrating a grasp of the English language befitting a New York Time’s best selling author with this little gem, “A economic”. Behold the brilliance!

See How They Spin: The Hunger Games Edition

Even before “The Hunger Games” movie was released, both right and left were trying to claim that the message of the story reflected their values.

Having read all of the books, unlike most who have penned the reviews I’ve read, I can safely say that the leftist progressives are way off base with their claims.

Their attempts to cast THG as paying homage to progressivism are incoherent and desperate. Current.com attempted to combat the claims made by Eric Bolling of Fox News’ The Five, that THG had a conservative message, with a piece by Julie Booth entitled; ‘The Hunger Games’: 5 scenes that send a progressive message”.

I was interested to see what Julie would nit-pick from the film and recast as ‘progressively’ themed. She did not disappoint. Here are the 5 progressively themed scenes she found in the movie. (my commentary in bold) Oh and before I forget I’ll add something that Julie left out of her piece ***SPOILER ALERT, MAJOR PLOT POINTS WILL BE REVEALED, DO NOT READ IF YOU WANT TO BE SURPRISED WHEN YOU SEE THE MOVIE!***

From Julie’s piece;
So we’ve put Bolling’s theory to the test and discovered five moments that suggest “The Hunger Games” actually sends a prominently progressive message (if the progressive message is so prevalent why could you only come up with 5 moments Julie?!):
1. Rue’s Funeral – The nation of Panem is divided into 12 districts (actually there are 13 districts and a Capitol, these are things you’d know if you had read the books, but please continue), each segregated with electrified fences. During the games, Katniss creates an alliance with a tribute named Rue from District 11, a poor, primarily black district. When Rue dies in the Hunger Games, Katniss places flowers around her body and sends a signal of respect to the citizens of District 11 who are watching on the big screen. Rue’s death triggers a rebellion against the Capitol in District 11. The citizens there want a voice in how their government works; (Demanding that the government listen to the citizens, how very Tea Party of them!) how they’re allowed to live their lives (hmm, again, like the Tea Party, conservatives and libertarians who are adamantly opposed to ObamaCare because it imposes a demand upon them, to purchase healthcare, thus removing the freedom of individuals to decide how to live their lives). Katniss makes the choice to speak out against the elite-run government (um hello? Tea Party rallies?), showing flashes of the uprisings seen in the last couple of years throughout the Middle East, and from the Occupy movement (the only thing that the district 11 uprising and the occupy movement have in common is they both involved citizens acting violently towards police officers. The revolt in District 11 has everything to do with throwing off the oppressive hand of big government, and nothing to do with demanding free college tuition or the arrest of bank executives)

2. • Peeta’s speech to Katniss before the games – Knowing he may not make it out alive, Peeta tells Katniss that if he was going to die in the games, he still wanted to be himself (a reinforcement of the importance of individuality). Unlike the current crop of Republican presidential candidates, who are sprinting to the right to appease fringe elements in their party (also unlike the occupy wall street crowd who proudly proclaim ‘we are the 99%!’, ceding their individuality and happily joining the collective), Peeta refuses to change himself for the Capitol. He will not accept the idea that it’s OK to lie, steal and, in this case, kill in order to advance in society (or government) (I can think of a politician, **cough President Obama cough** who habitually lies, and steals tax payer dollars which he funnels to his green buddies). He wants out of their system and firmly states that the Capitol will not change the person that he is.

3. • Suicide Plan – In the middle of the games, the Capitol announces that there can be two winners of The Hunger Games if they are from the same District. After Cato (Did you say Cato? As in the LIBERTARIAN Cato Institute? Must be a coincidence, after all it’s a fairly common name, let’s move along) from District 1 falls to his death, Katniss and Peeta are left standing as the winners. But when the Capitol announces they have revoked this rule and there can be only one winner, Katniss plans a double suicide by proposing that they both eat poisonous berries. The didn’t choose to be part of a televised war with their peers. They didn’t choose to have their names put in the reaping. In this scene, they finally make a choice of their own. They choose not to be pawns in the Capitol’s game of control over the Districts (sounds like an exercise of individual liberty/ free-will to me). Just because a government says war is necessary to maintain peace and order — doesn’t mean it’s true.

4. • Bull’s Eye – Before the Hunger Games begin, each tribute is given a score based on their skills and the gamekeeper’s stereotypes on gender, race and class (really? Is that how it worked? Did we see the same movie?). The gamekeepers rudely ignore Katniss (because they are elitist creeps, see Obama’s dismissive language about PA voters clinging to God and guns) during her skill evaluation because she is a woman from a poor, overlooked District. To gain their attention, she shoots an arrow straight into the apple inside a roasted pig’s mouth, shocking a crowd of dining Capitol members. Rather than just accept the low score the Capitol plans to assign her, which would doom her chances of survival in the Hunger Games, Katniss makes her voice heard. Her arrow is a terrifying reminder to the gamekeepers the women can not be overlooked. Her outrage is reflected in the real life battle women are fighting with Republicans to protect their reproductive freedoms (oh so the recently branded “war on women”, was a theme that Suzanne Collins had in mind when she wrote the series years ago? I’m not buying it but keep clutching at straws Julie!)

5.”Girl on Fire” Concept – Cinna, the stylist assigned to the underdogs of District 12, crafted a non-traditional image for Katniss and Peeta. Instead of coal miners (who are treated poorly and looked down upon by those in the Capitol, not unlike the Obama administration and its great disdain for coal production and complete disregard for how EPA regulations are costing coal industry jobs), Cinna dressed them in black and set their costumes on fire, creating a blazing chariot at the opening ceremony. But their act of rebellion in this scene is not their flaming outfits; it’s that Katniss and Peeta hold hands. This simple act shows that they have rejected the role the Capitol planned out for them, which is to view each other as enemies. Instead of becoming propaganda the Capitol can use to control the Districts, they light the fire of rebellion (a rebellion that champions the rights of individuals to be free from the vice-grip of big government, doesn’t sound like a progressive movement to me…)

What’s next for you Julie? Perhaps a spin-job on “Animal Farm” that recasts it as an endorsement of wind energy?

Are You Going to Believe Them or Your Lying Eyes?

You've Probably Seen This Picture

But You Probably Haven't Seen This Picture

Almost a month has passed since Congressional Democrats staged what one CBS reporter called, “a pretend hearing while Congress is not in session” so that Ms. Sandra Fluke, a third year Georgetown Law student might give her ‘testimony’. According to most media reports, Ms. Fluke was not permitted to testify before the House Oversight and Government Reform Committee during its hearing on the birth control mandate, by Chairman Rep Darrell Issa (R-CA) because she is a woman.

This could not be further from the truth. The actual reason that Rep Issa did not allow Ms. Fluke to testify has been entirely overlooked because it does not fit well with the Democrat’s assertion that there is war going on, ‘The Republican war on women”. In order to further is myth, the focus was shifted to the optics, and away from the facts.

The panel of experts, invited by the Republicans on the committee, were all men, oh the horror! Would you look at that?! Those nasty, women-hating Republicans held a hearing on birth control and would not allow a single woman to voice her opinion!

A Google search of “Issa contraception hearing” turns up page after page of headlines like ABC news’ “Rep Darrell Issa Bars Minority Witness, a Woman, on Contraception”.

But that’s not the whole story. Rep. Issa explained to in a Op-Ed published by Roll Call :

“The House Oversight and Government Reform Committee recently convened the first Congressional hearing on the administration’s mandate that religious employers pay for abortion-inducing drugs, contraceptives and sterilization procedures in their employee health care plans, despite the fact that some of these items and services violate the employers’ core religious teachings.
The committee heard from a Catholic, a Lutheran, a Baptist, a rabbi and university administrators united in their opposition to the administration’s mandate. These men and women spoke eloquently about their concerns, not because they share the same views about contraception or even abortion (they do not) but because they value their religious freedom, guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution.’

In the same Op-Ed, Rep. Issa also addressed the Democrat’s claim that no women were allowed to testify:

“As Democrats asked, “Where are the women?” 20 feet from them, Dr. Allison Garrett from Oklahoma Christian University and Dr. Laura Champion from Calvin College would explain their belief that this was an issue of religious freedom, not contraception.”

It would seem that there really wasn’t a Republican ban on women at the hearing. But why wasn’t Ms. Fluke permitted to testify? A Washington Examiner article by Byron York offers this from a “Republican committee source”:

“After days of asking for a witness, they waited until the last minute, the afternoon before the hearing. They asked us to invite Rev. Barry Lynn [head of Americans United for Separation of Church and State] and Ms. Fluke. We said we’ll invite one, per standard procedure. We formally invited Rev. Lynn, and the Democrats, at 4:30 pm, changed their mind and said they wanted Fluke. We said too late. They told Rev. Lynn not to show up the next day.”

So why not allow Ms. Fluke to testify in Rev. Lynn’s stead? The York continues:

As for Fluke, Issa said Republicans had never heard of the Democrats’ last-minute choice. “I asked our staff what is her background, what has she done,” Issa said at the hearing. “They did the usual that we do when we’re not provided the three days and the forms to go with it. They did a Google search. They looked and found that she was, in fact, and is a college student who appears to have become energized over this issue and participated in approximately a 45-minute press conference…I cannot and will not arbitrarily take a majority or minority witness if they do not have the appropriate credentials, both for a hearing at the full committee of the U.S. House of Representatives and if we cannot vet them in a timely fashion.” (Fluke is in fact a 30 year-old law student with an extensive history of activism in leftist causes.)

There is a reason that this side of the story has been grossly under-reported. The Democrat Party and those members of the media who repeat their talking points rather than reporting factually based news, recognize that the President’s approval rating is on the decline. They have gone into full-on survival mode. They understand that their continued grasp on power necessitates the perpetuation of the myth that there is a ‘Republican war on women’.

Even though the ‘Republican war on women’ never actually began, I am declaring officially over as of this very moment.

If you’re interested in watching the second panel of experts that appeared before the Committee, the panel which included female experts Dr. Allison Garrett and Dr. Laura Champion, here it is

Free People or Free Stuff?


Free People or Free Stuff? That’s what it’s all about. From the Tea Party protests, to the Occupy Wall Street camps, to the latest go-round featuring Ms. Fluke vs Rush Limbaugh, the real issue, the one that no one seems to define correctly is this; do we want to be a free people or a people who demand free stuff?

The driving force behind the Tea Party movement has been the protection of the individual against the tyrannical overreach of big government. Theirs is the full-throated cry of a free people who do not wish to be slaves, and to that end they steadfastly refuse to sacrifice their labor and lives to those who demand something for free.

The Tea Party people have chosen instead to cast off the chains, and turn on their would-be masters, and look at the result. The masters loosed their dogs on them. The media happily served in the vanguard. They ferociously attacked the Tea Party on a daily basis. They fabricated stories about the Tea Party in an attempt to discredit them so that people would disregard their message. The 2010 mid-term election results proved that their efforts failed, people were still willing to listen. Then we saw a new movement rise, the people who demand free stuff. They call themselves Occupy Wall Street.

The Occupy Wall Street people say that they represent the 99% and have continually asserted that we all have a right to certain objects of value; houses, college educations, jobs, etc. But claiming to have a right which forces another to give you something, while they receive nothing in return, demonstrates a fundamental misunderstanding of what a constitutes a right. Rights, as understood by our framers and enshrined by them in our founding documents, are a natural consequence of our existence. We are born with them. None of us enters this world with a cell phone, a month’s supply of birth control pills, or free college tuition clutched within our tiny fists. If this should ever happen we can most certainly revisit the topic.

Free people and people who demand free stuff, cannot peacefully coexist within the same society. For when people demand they be given something for free, what they are doing, whether it be knowingly or unwittingly, is echoing the call made by every despotic and tyrannical government, for the enslavement of some for the benefit of others.

The time for choosing is upon us, what’s it going to be, free people or free stuff?

The Party of Hate

angry-obamaThis past summer, Democrat politicians and their talking-point armed pundits, delighted in dubbing the GOP “The Party of NO”.  Had they succeeded in passing universal health care they most certainly would have broken their arms patting themselves on the back for that one, and oh how clever they were!  What a zinger! “The Party of NO”, boy does that sting!  While I’m still smarting, I think I’ll heed our dear leader’s advice and ‘punch back twice as hard’;

Dear Democrat Party, I dub thee “The Party of Hate”.

angry-biden

What’s that you’re shouting?

56039554MW002_Senate_Holds_

“NO”!

rep-nancy-pelosi

Excuse me that’s our mantra remember?  I will extend to you the courtesy of explaining why I chose this moniker for you as surely you’re having trouble comprehending my word choice.  It’s quite simple you see, The Democrat Party perpetually preaches hatred.  The party demonizes big business from oil to insurance.  It claims we must abhor the rich, profits and SUVs and it fervently attacks individuals, Bush, Rove, Thomas, Scalia, Palin, Bachmann, Limbaugh, Levin, Hannity, Rumsfeld and let’s not forget the man that has ‘blood that drips from his teeth’, the devil himself, Dick Cheney.

This tangled mass of hatred was born from one simple seed, the hatred of free market capitalism.  It is a system in which those who trade only in the monetarily worthless commodity that is emotion can not thrive let alone survive.  Since proper function within the boundaries of this system is a practical impossibility for these hate peddlers, they persistently strive for it’s destruction.  Although hate has no value, it can be an extremely powerful weapon when wielded by reckless hands.  But have no fear my fellow “Party of No” friends, we can disarm them by simply saying “no” to what they’re selling.

Dancing with the Stars and Stripes

ballroom_dancing

Like a true lady, America has been generous with her dance card.  She has allowed 43 different men to escort her onto the floor, one of them on two separate occasions.  Each man has been strikingly different from the next.  They have varied in age, religion, race, ethnicity, education, social status and philosophy.
Some have guided her with skill and grace.  Twirling her elegantly in time with the music, encouraging her proudly to display the breadth of her beauty.  They have allowed her to absorb the spotlight while following her lead.
Others have not been such selfless partners. There are those who have stepped on her toes because they’ve chosen to dance to a different beat than the one she is hearing.   A few have even spiked her punch and attempted to convince her to relinquish her values in exchange for theirs.
She never abandons any of these gentlemen before the music has stopped.   She always makes good on the contract of her dance card.  At times she’s basked in the warmth of the spotlight.  But she has also known the frigid depths of the shadow cast by a partner’s ego.  All the while she has kept her head held high and her principles close.  She has remained dignified, humble and open to dancing with whomever she is paired.
She currently finds herself in the arms of a man who wishes to guide her across the floor in a manner with which she is completely unfamiliar.  To her this dance is completely foreign and seems to be leading in an uncharted direction.  She is finding it increasingly more difficult to will her feet to comply with these new steps.  The result is two dancers spinning quite clumsily and entirely haphazardly across the floor.
America is tripping over the feet of a man who wants her to follow his lead, to conform to his chosen rhythm.  He cares little about the proper execution of the predetermined choreography; he has brought his own drummer.
There are some who are in awe of the brazen manner of America’s latest dance partner.  His approach is new and different.  His arrogant steps are sloppy and have fallen out of time with the music., but they happily overlook the quality of his performance, because they love his style.
Other audience members are staring in wide-eyed disbelief as America, their consummate favorite and reigning champion is being made to look like an amateur.  They pray that she can last the length of this song.  Can she maintain her dignity when she is being made to look like such a fool?  Can she recover after so many missteps?  Will she live to dance another day?
If she holds true to what she knows to be right, she can regain control of the pace.  She can finish strong and smiling and will retain her standing in the world.  But if she chooses to acquiesce to her partner’s will, her bright star will be extinguished forever.
The outcome will be decided by a two-judge panel presided over by Time and History.  These two may have the final say as to her fate, but their decision is highly susceptible to public opinion.  Now is not a time for shyness, applaud if you like the show you’re watching or boo if you’re unimpressed, believe me the judges are all ears.

Spare Change for Italy

spare_change

Early this morning central Italy was rocked by a 6.3 magnitude earthquake.  It has left over 100 dead and thousands homeless.  Many world leaders have offered their condolences and have pledged monetary aid.  Considering the Washington spending spree that commenced the moment  Barack Obama took office one might assume that we would be cutting Italy a check with a minimum of six figures.  If you count the change there are seven figures present in the $50,000.00 that Obama has pledged in aid to Italy.  While our President is on a world tour claiming a major change in the tone of US foregin relations is the best we can offer Italy really only fifty thousand dollars?

The Italians should be insulted especially considering that during his first month in office President Obama approved $900,000,000 in aid to the Palestinians for rebuilding efforts in Gaza.  These funds were pledged to Gaza despite the well known fact that Gaza is controlled by Hamas.  For those of you unfamiliar with Hamas I’ll give you a brief overview of this organization; Hamas is a militant Palestinian organization founded in the late 1960’s, which refuses to recognize the state of Israel.  It operates a terrorist wing which has carried out over 350 attacks including suicide bombings and short-range rocket attacks on the Israeli people.  Hamas became the controlling party of the Palestinian legislature in 2006.

President Obama has quickly and drastically changed the tone of US foreign relations and policies.  We’re now giving hundreds of millions of dollars in aid to one of the most despicable organizations on the planet so that they may rebuild an area that has been decimated as a direct result of their militant actions.  While in the case of the Italian government who have suffered destruction due to no fault of their own, we’re giving them less than one tenth of one percent of what we gave to Gaza.  So is aiding groups who support terrorist activities with millions of US dollars while offering embarrassingly small amounts to a country who came to our aid following hurricane Katrina and is now dealing with a natural disaster on its on soil, the kind of change so many hoped to see when they voted for President Obama?